2. If the character had more than two arms with which to wield dueling daggers, would they increase their AC for each extra off-hand dueling dagger?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As for stacking multiples this is an untyped bonus to AC, so will stack with anything but another untyped bonus from the same source. I would say multiple items of the same type are same source, just like multiple castings of the same spell would be.
If the character had more than two arms with which to wield dueling daggers, would they increase their AC for each extra off-hand dueling dagger?
The rules are aimed at normal humanoids and do not deal (ever) with the case of multiple arms, so RAW it's up to the GM. But I suspect that if they'd been thinking of multiple arms they would've made it a shield bonus, so it wouldn't help to have more than one (or just one and a shield).
1. Yes.
2. Yes, but a lot of GMs will rule otherwise. They really should have made it a shield bonus. Items that grant untyped bonuses to AC are extremely rare, if for no other reason than nobody wants to see it happen to an ioun stone.
blahpers, are you sure the answer to two isn't no because of same source stacking? i can't think of another item with an untyped bonus off the top of my head, but i'd think even if an ioun stone had an untyped bonus, the same type of ioun stone is the same source. though, admittedly, i don't think 'source' is rigorously defined.
1. Yes.
2. Yes, but a lot of GMs will rule otherwise. They really should have made it a shield bonus. Items that grant untyped bonuses to AC are extremely rare, if for no other reason than nobody wants to see it happen to an ioun stone.
ioun stones require a specific exception allowing them to stack. Same source applies.
ioun stones require a specific exception allowing them to stack. Same source applies.1. Yes.
2. Yes, but a lot of GMs will rule otherwise. They really should have made it a shield bonus. Items that grant untyped bonuses to AC are extremely rare, if for no other reason than nobody wants to see it happen to an ioun stone.
Nothing in your link suggests this, but that's not really important--you could replace this with any slotless item and the principle would be the same.
It isn't a shield bonus or something similar because it increases the bonus from fighting defensively or combat expertise (untyped and dodge respectively).
The dagger doesn't provide a bonus itself at all, what it does is if you are wielding it, the above actions provide a benefit of one higher than normal.
It is a yes/no question. Either you are wielding it, or you aren't so wielding it multiple times (i.e. having multiple daggers) isn't going to be more of a 'yes' than just wielding one.
The wording suggests otherwise:
When you fight defensively or use Combat Expertise while wielding a dueling dagger, your bonus to AC increases by 1.
Wielding one? Increase the bonus by 1.
Wielding seven? Increase the bonus by 1 seven times.Edit: I get it--"same source" applies. My point isn't that it doesn't or that it shouldn't. My point is that Paizo's definition of "same source" is so nebulous as to be impossible to adjudicate other than on a case by case basis, so it's essentially useless as a rule. I mean, they had to release a FAQ stating that "Strength bonus" is somehow a "source" for this purpose, which literally nobody interpreted that way.
actually, i think dave is right and it's nothing to do with same source.
"When you fight defensively or use Combat Expertise while wielding a dueling dagger" is the condition, and it is satisfied regardless of how many >0 daggers you wield, which increases your bonus to AC by 1.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Each item has its own instance of said condition, though. Fighting defensively satisfies the conditions of seven different item abilities. Reading them as somehow coalescing into one triggered ability is just as arbitrary as calling it a "same source" scenario.
yeah, you're right.
No, because it’s "When you fight defensively OR use Combat Expertise while wielding a dueling dagger" (emphasis mine), not “When you fight defensively, and when you use Combat Expertise.”
No, because it’s "When you fight defensively OR use Combat Expertise while wielding a dueling dagger" (emphasis mine), not “When you fight defensively, and when you use Combat Expertise.”
Nah, it could be written as "and/or", and still wouldn't grant a +2. That's because it is written as a one effect with two conditions.
The reason it doesn't stack is because the effect is only stated once. It doesn't matter that the condition can be fulfilled in two different ways, the effect ist granted based on whether or not the condition(s) is/are fulfilled, not based on how many conditions are fulfilled. It would need to say so for that to be the case, or the effect would need to be written twice.
The reason why you would not get the +1 twice when using Fighting Defensive and Combat Expertise is because you are getting the bonus from the same source.
Nope, the dagger does not grant a bonus of any kind, it modifies an existing one. Also, both fighting defensively and Combat Expertise grant dodge bonuses, which stack even if they're from the same source. Defensive Dagger would need to grant a seperate, untyped bonus (which would behave differently, e.g. not be lost when flat-footed), to not stack because of stacking rules.
I would rule on the side of no because using multiple shields doesn't increase your AC so using multiple daggers should not be able to do that either.
Dual wilding shields is much more useful, though (because of Shield Master), and at least for fighting defensively, the effect of wielding two dueling daggers could be replicated by using one in combination with the blocking weapon property (which grants a +1 shield bonus to AC "when you use this weapon to fight defensively").